Even with that in mind, there is no evidence that the consumer would benefit financially anyhow.
The most likely outcome is that the developer simply pockets the % they are not paying Apple / Google and prices remain stagnant.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Coalition for App Fairness: Apple is Using Subpoenas to Punish Opponents by Prying Into Confidential Communications
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The most likely outcome is that the developer simply pockets the % they are not paying Apple / Google and prices remain stagnant.
When the Mac was first introduced there was no way to create an App Store like we know today. Internet access was not easily obtained unless you were in academia, for example. Distribution via stores was the model, and by the time app stores became viable replacing it was not a viable option. Even so, developers using the IPHone/iPad stores get a much better deal than under the old model.
Exactly. They want the benefits at no cost to them beyond a developer account.
My thoughts as well. Have smaller developers cut their prices 15% or even 10% or so when Apple cut their fee?
A judge gets to decide what must be provided. Ignoring a judge’s order is not likely to end well. A judge can reduce the scope to prevent a fishing expedition but you must comply or suffer the consequences, don’t even think about destroying anything once it may be subject to discovery.
Having been involved in potential lawsuits once we heard one was filed we collected everything to ensure nothing was even accidentally destroyed, although stuff destroyed per policy before that was ok. For example, all our working papers were destroyed once the final report was written, but when we were sued, even before being served, we saved everything just to be safe. We may not have to turn it over but that was the judge’s call.
They should change their name from "The Coalition for App Fairness" to *The Coalition for free rides*.
Apple has filed a subpoena against the Coalition for App Fairness, requesting details on their communications as Apple fights a series of antitrust lawsuits. The Coalition for App Fairness comprises several companies who have been critical of Apple's App Store rules and fees, including Epic Games, Spotify, Deezer, Tile, and Match Group.
Members of the Coalition for App Fairness earlier this month filed a lawsuit (via Apple Insider) attempting to prevent Apple's subpoenas from being approved. The Coalition for App Fairness is afraid that Apple will use those private communications to retaliate against coalition members.
The Coalition for App Fairness says that it is not involved in Apple's antitrust matters, which were filed before the coalition was formed. Apple has also subpoenaed communications from Forbes Tate Partners LLC, a public affairs firm used by the Coalition for App Fairness, and Meghan DiMuzio, the coalition's executive director.
Apple is seeking a "host of documents and communications," such as formation documents, activities, meeting minutes, recruitment efforts, membership lists, financing, communications between coalition members and potential members, and communications between coalition members and any foreign or domestic governmental entity or official relating to Apple.
The Coalition for App Fairness says that if the subpoenas are approved, it could "chill the candor" of member discussions and the "effectiveness of the Coalition's advocacy efforts."Communications between coalition members are "irrelevant to the claims and defenses in the antitrust cases and are disproportional to the needs of the cases," according to the filing.
The Coalition for App Fairness has asked the judge to "quash" Apple's subpoenas entirely. Apple is seeking the documentation for the class action antitrust lawsuit that it is dealing with.
Article Link: Coalition for App Fairness: Apple is Using Subpoenas to Punish Opponents by Prying Into Confidential Communications
I don’t think you’re wrong, but in general iOS owners are generally wealthier with more disposable income to spend on apps.
Technically you are correct. But ever hear the phrase "blood from a turnip"? CAF is a turnip. It can go "poof" without a trace. It has no valuable assets, products, etc... The hard drives can get accidentally wiped by the IT subcontractor located in a 3rd world country, or even a New York state private residence basement (you mean wiped with a cloth?? Yes, that works even for non-politicians!!).
Funny story: I was "ordered" by a Judge to hand over photographs I took of what can be best described as a "historical artifact" that was on public land. I had taken those photographs while working as a volunteer for historical preservation organization. A local government had asserted ownership of this artifact, and so did a private party. The ownership dispute ended up in a state court. The historical preservation organization was dragged in because the government asked them (us) to survey the artifact because the government had no survey resources of their own. We had to sign all sorts of "volunteer" agreements with the government to participate, but they did not think to have us assign copyrights of our works. So we as individuals retained all copyrights to our works (photos, drawings, etc...). Copyright is established on the federal level so only federal courts have jurisdiction.
I can't tell you how much fun it was to appear and inform "Your Honor" their little kangaroo court does not have jurisdiction over copyright so NO, I'm not handing in my work. Of course I had to be polite, but the smile on my face was so huge it effectively projected the "go F*&&% yourself" message!
Judges only have so much power. At least for now, the US is a system of limited government power. But huge corporations like Apple are working hard to wrestle that power from courts and governments, and also create new forms of power and control over society. This must be resisted at all costs. Apple needs to to go down on this issue.
Don’t know why story is framed this way. It’s allegations of potential punishment as opposed to coalition members likely violating contractual agreements they have with Apple.
I have no great sympathy for these companies trying to wrench part of apples income into their boats after having benefitted from access to apples customer base.
one man’s coalition is another man’s collusive collective.
I have no great sympathy for these companies trying to wrench part of apples income into their boats after having benefitted from access to apples customer base.
one man’s coalition is another man’s collusive collective.
Document preservation notices ahead of litigation are standard practice from any competent law department within any ethically run company.
I don't think it's just about disposable income.
Monument Valley Team Reveals The Cost And Reward Of Making A Hit iOS Game | TechCrunch
Games and the formula that leads to their success can be a bit of a mystery, perhaps more so on mobile. One of 2014's big hits, both in terms of critical and audience success, was Monument Valley by ustwogames. The isometric 3D puzzler was breathtaking in terms of its visual design and had nice...
techcrunch.com
According to the developer, piracy on android accounted for 95% of app installs.
I think there's definitely an argument to be made about how a closed ecosystem can actually be healthier and more financially sustainable for all stakeholders. Less piracy on iOS mans more people paying for apps, which means more revenue for developers.
"Brave" by Sara Bareillis ...
If you've never heard it before, highly recommend you give it a listen.
If you've never heard it before, highly recommend you give it a listen.
I don't think it's just about disposable income.
Monument Valley Team Reveals The Cost And Reward Of Making A Hit iOS Game | TechCrunch
Games and the formula that leads to their success can be a bit of a mystery, perhaps more so on mobile. One of 2014's big hits, both in terms of critical and audience success, was Monument Valley by ustwogames. The isometric 3D puzzler was breathtaking in terms of its visual design and had nice...
According to the developer, piracy on android accounted for 95% of app installs.
I think there's definitely an argument to be made about how a closed ecosystem can actually be healthier and more financially sustainable for all stakeholders. Less piracy on iOS mans more people paying for apps, which means more revenue for developers.
There are Pros & there are Cons.
One BIG Negative is that Apple has Complete & Total Control of "App Discovery".
Ask yourself, why does Apple flood the today tab of their App Store App almost every single day with Game Apps & Apple Arcade Apps, & why is there NO settings filter to Filter that Off ?
NOT Rocket Science, the today tab of the App Store App is how Apple Controls the Narrative !
Apple needs competition at-least WRT "App Discovery".
The NON-Game portion of the App Store will blossom IFF that happens !
Well they do know why -- and it has nothing to do with apps, devs, laws, best for consumers or logic. Their motivation for "why" is a much more, ahem, focused in one specific area.
Last edited:
Does competition need to come from within the App Store though? We have websites like Macstories as well as YouTubers like Chris Lawley which help to surface new and interesting apps.
And the App Store promotes like a small handful of apps a day. It’s not going to solve the overall problem, which is that there are just too many apps in the App Store crowding each other out, no matter who gets featured at the end of the day.
I don't think it's just about disposable income.
Monument Valley Team Reveals The Cost And Reward Of Making A Hit iOS Game | TechCrunch
Games and the formula that leads to their success can be a bit of a mystery, perhaps more so on mobile. One of 2014's big hits, both in terms of critical and audience success, was Monument Valley by ustwogames. The isometric 3D puzzler was breathtaking in terms of its visual design and had nice...
According to the developer, piracy on android accounted for 95% of app installs.
I think there's definitely an argument to be made about how a closed ecosystem can actually be healthier and more financially sustainable for all stakeholders. Less piracy on iOS mans more people paying for apps, which means more revenue for developers.
That's well said.
Even beyond that, this is about choice (and about trolls and a certain slice of people who just hate Apple). Google wants to deliver a more open way while Apple wants to deliver a closed eco? That is their choices and consumers choices to select a platform. Those who hate Apple's closed eco can go with Android. How simple, right?
Ummm.....that is SOP in such instances. Must not have a very strong case to come to the public with such complaints ....
Apple has filed a subpoena against the Coalition for App Fairness, requesting details on their communications as Apple fights a series of antitrust lawsuits. The Coalition for App Fairness comprises several companies who have been critical of Apple's App Store rules and fees, including Epic Games, Spotify, Deezer, Tile, and Match Group.
Members of the Coalition for App Fairness earlier this month filed a lawsuit (via Apple Insider) attempting to prevent Apple's subpoenas from being approved. The Coalition for App Fairness is afraid that Apple will use those private communications to retaliate against coalition members.
The Coalition for App Fairness says that it is not involved in Apple's antitrust matters, which were filed before the coalition was formed. Apple has also subpoenaed communications from Forbes Tate Partners LLC, a public affairs firm used by the Coalition for App Fairness, and Meghan DiMuzio, the coalition's executive director.
Apple is seeking a "host of documents and communications," such as formation documents, activities, meeting minutes, recruitment efforts, membership lists, financing, communications between coalition members and potential members, and communications between coalition members and any foreign or domestic governmental entity or official relating to Apple.
The Coalition for App Fairness says that if the subpoenas are approved, it could "chill the candor" of member discussions and the "effectiveness of the Coalition's advocacy efforts."Communications between coalition members are "irrelevant to the claims and defenses in the antitrust cases and are disproportional to the needs of the cases," according to the filing.
The Coalition for App Fairness has asked the judge to "quash" Apple's subpoenas entirely. Apple is seeking the documentation for the class action antitrust lawsuit that it is dealing with.
Article Link: Coalition for App Fairness: Apple is Using Subpoenas to Punish Opponents by Prying Into Confidential Communications
Always suspicious when 'X' ('The Workers Party'...'Peoples Campaign'....'Demons against Bad Goodness' ) try to 'cloak' themselves in something 'high and mighty'. Rather than the truth : ' The Coalition for more (money/power) for US!'.
I can see that the financing of this might show who they actually are. If they think that’s “sensitive”, then maybe they aren’t who they say they are🍸😼
Then why did they choose iOS? And if they're now just somehow understanding their app choices are via single more secure App Store, why not now switch to Android? Great news for you all, Apple devices tend to hold very good resale value. 1. Sell iPhone 2. Take that money down to buy Android device 3. New platform that has what you're (now) looking for, multiple avenues to download apps (that are mostly free).
See how that works?
Maybe they chose it, despite the Apple app store monopoly. Maybe they like the Apple hardware best and are willing to live with the restriction of a single store, without liking it. Lots of reasons to take into account when making a decision. Buying an Apple product doesn't equal approving of everything they do.
My company has about a dozen apps in the Apple and Google Play stores and as the guy who has to submit the apps, working with Apple is a freaking PITA. I'd love an alternative.
I don't doubt that there will be a number of reasons if you polled all iPhone users.
Smartphone market or other consumer product spaces, some will not get every feature or function they want or wish it had. That can also certainly be true of app offerings.
That doesn't change the underlying principle: here's how Apple offers it. Here's how the competition offers it. They each have their offering choice, we the consumers have the purchase choice.
I want Apple to perform stringent App vetting, IMO most iPhone users do. Stringent equals less chance of something nefarious. Your company's apps may be completely benign and good, I have no reason to doubt that. Yet unfortunately that will not be the case of some of your brethren app companies. And unfortunately it take only a very small slice to create a bad situation. It's the sad and unfortunate reality of the internet->device app/extension/script running install. I suspect it's a small fraction of Internet actors but their effect is very outsized. It hurts your company, me/users, Apple-Google-Microsoft-Others,
Last edited:
Which is fine… just don’t try and enforce your views on other people to change the way things currently work. Petition for a new product from other manufacturers to meet your specific needs and leave the product alone that already meets many users needs.
Wrong. It’s like if were only 2 platforms to distribute movies. If a consumer chooser one it totally exclude the others and capture the customer.
One if rather open. The other says "you cannot have movies I don't like"
- no critics, no movies shot by a camera of brand X, no movies filmed the second day of the week, and to protect children, no movies were there is are even fights between children. The platform takes 30% of all the revenue. It also competes with movies which doesn't respect the policy applied to others.
It would definitely be a problem for customers and content creator and this monopole should be destroyed, for the common good.
some apps would provide in-app purchase, unlike now.
Apps which are currently not possible because of Apple policy would appear.
Asof app quality, it would change a thing. As you can already build a crap and Apple will accept it on the Appstore anyway, as long as it works..